Quick glance at ISP materials shows that it considers the affective part of inquiry as well as the steps. This is unique and interesting.
What is the rationale behind this approach?
Rationale: constructivist - students learn better by constructing their own knowledge rather than being given facts. Kuhlthau was a librarian and saw patterns of student confusion and frustration as she helped with research paper process. Framework addresses the steps in the inquiry process, but also the affective states likely at each level, the attitudes likely to yield a positive result, and how the librarian can intervene in the process (Shannon).
Perhaps more research-based than some other approaches
What are the inquiry steps and processes in this model?
Stages: 1) Initiation - thinking about assignment (uncertainty and apprehension) 2) Selection - what do I know, what do I need to find out (confusion but later optimism) 3) Exploration - explore topic to help find focus (confusion and doubt) (She calls this "the dip") 4) Formulation - settle on focus and develop personal perspective (if focus - optimistic and confident; if no focus, completion is unlikely)Kuhlthau says development of focus (the student's guiding idea) is pivotal. 5) Collection - bathing info (increased interest and confidence) 6) Presentation - Prepare to present and share (relief or disappointment)
In each of these stages, ISP looks at three areas of experience:
Does Kuhlthau focus on the smaller skills needed for students to be successful in these stages of the process?
I don't really know anything else about this model.
Is ISP for all ages or targeted at a particular age range?
ISP was originally targeted at high school students, college students, and adults. Kuhlthau has also published sequence of developmentally appropriate foundational skills for elementary-and-middle school-aged children. (Shannon)
Students most likely to be productive when exhibiting an "invitational" attitude (exploratory, open to new learning, ideas, and perspectives) during early stages and "indicative" mood (actions that lead to conclusion or closure)during the later stages. ("Information Search Process")
What are the implications of the affective/mood parts of this framework? Does the librarian work to bring about the proper affect in the student, or does he/she bring it to the student's attention?
Not a "'teacher-proof' formula or template, but rather an inquiry-based approach to teaching and learning" (Shannon). This is pretty obvious just by reading it. It doesn't appear that much effort has been put into making it "catchy" or a quick learn. In the article, Kuhlthau is quoted as saying "Implementation of the ISP requires a thoughtful professional who can adapt the concept to fit the local situation" (Shannon).
Is this a strategy that would be used school-wide with faculty, or is it mainly directed toward librarians?Is it a strategy that is even shared with students? Or is it a framework for the librarian to consider?
Kuhlthau talks about a "zone of intervention" that moves the student from uncertainty and confusion to "further construction and understanding". Probably just this article, but not a lot of specifics about this process given. ("Information Search Process").
Are there specifics given for this "zone of intervention" (and how appropriate intervention would look)?
What makes this model different from other models of inquiry (which may have similar steps)?
ISP was apparently the first model to take the emotional (or affective) side of research into account. That feelings are as important as the actions during the process. She also found that when students understood the process they felt more satisfied with it. (Kracker)
How does the affective part impact teaching?
Kracker did a study where undergrad students were given a 30 minute overview of ISP as part of preparation for a research project. They reported statistically lower levels of "research anxiety" than the placebo. Apparently even a general overview of the process can (perhaps through understanding that it is innate to the process) alleviate some of the feelings of confusion and anxiety that accompany the research process. The authors suggest that if students are to actually understand the process, however, more sessions would be needed (Kracker).
Reynolds describes a high school that had adopted the ISP approach for a major research paper (Extended Essay) all students are required to write over a twelve month period. The process is introduced through the project handbook and through classes led by the librarian and teachers. The school used the framework to divide the process up into steps and embed timelines and multiple accountability tasks within the process. They found that 75% of respondents to a end-of-year survey felt the ISP process helped them stay on task. 88% felt that following the steps would lead to success in their research. (Reynolds).
Would an approach like this make it easier for teachers to continue reinforcing the approach when the librarian is not or cannot be in the class?
One more Kuhlthau article: The steps in Kuhlthau's ISP were originally based on Kelly, but were supported by a number of studies looking at high school and college students. These studies confirmed the stages students go through in the information seeking process. Kuhlthau's six stage model was developed as a result. Other studies also reinforced the affective stages that students go through during the process ("Information Search Process: A Summary").
My sum-up: ISP was developed by Kuhlthau as a constructivist approach - using their prior knowledge, students build meaning themselves rather than just being given facts by the teacher. The inquiry process Kuhlthau uses is nothing too shocking - most inquiry models go through similar steps, though they may have different names and divisions. Perhaps the most interesting thing about the ISP approach is that it takes into account the feelings students (and adults) typically go through during the research process. These often involve confusion and anxiety. Kuhlthau's work and Kracker's study suggest that when students understand that these feelings are a normal part of the process, they may feel more comfortable and less anxious, more satisfied with the process.ISP has not been made into a catchy acronym and is not especially "user-friendly". Kulhthau states that this isn't a scripted approach. This suggests to me that multiple sessions and practices would be necessary for students to learn or internalize the steps and behaviors used here. Referenced in the Kracker article (I could not find a full-text copy of the original) Vakkari later grouped the 6 steps into three broader headings: prefocus, focus, and postfocus, with a major decision present at the end of each stage. This division might make things a bit more manageable (or at least it feels more organized to me!). The Reynolds paper describes their implementation of the ISP process as taking place over a full year, with different mini-goals throughout to help ensure students are progressing appropriately. Some other models (those catchy acronyms :)) would appear to better lend themselves to "whole school adoption". They are easier for students to remember and perhaps easier for teachers to learn and implement (conversely, these models might not be as deep as ISP, either). For whole-school adoption of ISP to work, I think the librarian would really have to be a part of the planning and implementation of most (if not all) research projects. Having a standardized set of steps and tasks (as in Reynolds) could also be effective.
Kracker, Jacqueline. "Research Anxiety and Students' Perceptions of Research: An Experiment. Part I. Effect of Teaching Kuhlthau's ISP Model." Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 53.4 (2002): 282-294. Business Source Complete. Web. 17 Feb. 2014. Kuhlthau, Carol. "Information Search Process." Rutgers.edu. Rutgers, Oct. 2013. Web. 17 Feb. 2014. <http://comminfo.rutgers.edu/~kuhlthau/information_search_process.htm>.
Kuhlthau, Carol C. "Information Search Process: A Summary Of Research And Implications For School Library Media Programs." School Library Media Quarterly 18.1 (1989): 19-25. Web. 1 Mar. 2014. <http://www.ala.org/aasl/aaslpubsandjournals/slmrb/editorschoiceb/infopower/slctkuhlthau2> Reynolds, Helen. "The Information Search Process (The ISP) And The Research Essay. How One School Library Supports Learning By Using The ISP As The Framework For The Extended Essay." IASL Conference Reports (2010): 1-5. Library & Information Science Source. Web. 17 Feb. 2014. Shannon, Donna. "Kuhlthau's Information Search Process." School Library Monthly 19.1 (2002): 19-23. Education Source. Web. 17 Feb 2014.
Cummings in green
De Angelis in brown
Inquiry Process: ISP
Know
Want to Learn
Learn
Further Questions
Stages:
One of many models of inquiry.
Exactly what feelings are experienced during research?
Initiating a Research Assignment: when a person first becomes aware of a lack of knowledge or understanding and feelings of uncertainty and apprehension are common.
(Kuhlthau, ISP, n.p.)
Feelings: apprehension, uncertainty
(Callison and Lamb, n.p.)
The zones of intervention are very confusing. Is there a clearer explanation out there? They sound to me simply like a reference interview.
Based on "feelings" of students while they research.
Do the feelings even matter? I would expect all the models of inquiry to produce the same feelings. It seems to be a natural progression.
Selecting a Topic: when a general area, topic, or problem is identified and initial uncertainty often gives way to a brief sense of optimism and a readiness to begin the search.
(Kuhlthau, ISP, n.p.)
Feelings: confusion, sometimes anxiety, brief elation, anticipation
(Callison and Lamb, n.p.)
What are the steps?
Exploring Information: when inconsistent, incompatible information is encountered and uncertainty, confusion, and doubt frequently increase and people find themselves “in the dip” of confidence.
(Kuhlthau, ISP, n.p.)
Feelings: confusion, uncertainty, doubt, sometimes threat
(Callison and Lamb, n.p.)
Formulating a Focus: when a focused perspective is formed and uncertainty diminishes as confidence begins to increase.
(Kuhlthau, ISP, n.p.)
Feelings: optimism, confidence in ability to complete task
(Callison and Lamb, n.p.)
Collecting Information: when information pertinent to the focused perspective is gathered and uncertainty subsides as interest and involvement deepens.
(Kuhlthau, ISP, n.p.)
Feelings: realization of extensive work to be done, confidence in ability to complete task, increased interest
(Callison and Lamb, n.p.)
Preparing to Present: when the search is completed with a new understanding enabling the person to explain his or her learning to others or in someway put the learning to use.
(Kuhlthau, ISP, n.p.)
Feelings: sense of relief, sometimes satisfaction, sometimes disappointment
(Callison and Lamb, n.p.)
Assessing the Process
Feelings: sense of accomplishment or sense of disappointment
(Callison and Lamb, n.p.)
When students are unclear about different aspects of the project, there are five zones where teachers can provide advice or assistance. Assistance outside of the zone can be intrusive or overwhelming.
(Kuhlthau, ISP, n.p.)
Students become uncertain and confused after inital sucess and motivation
(Kuhlthau, ISP, n.p.)
Many people give up after initial search
(Kuhlthau, ISP, n.p.)
covers thoughts, feelings, and actions at each stage, not just feelings
(Kuhlthau, ISP, n.p.)
Studies include schools, but also library users and the workplace
(Kuhlthau, ISP, n.p.)
From the user’s perspective the primary objective of information seeking is to accomplish the task that initiated the search.
(Kuhlthau, ISP, n.p.)
In zone 1 (Z 1) the problem is self-diagnosed and a search is self-conducted. The student can figure it out.
In zone 2 (Z2) through zone 5 (Z5) the problem is diagnosed through an interview to elicit a problem statement and background information: task, interest, time, and availability.
Z1: Librarian acts as organizer; no instruction Z2: Librarian acts as lecturer; orientation and overview provided Z3: Librarian acts as instructor; one type of source Z4: Librarian acts as tutor; strategy instruction with a variety of sources Z5: Librarian acts as counselor; holistic process instruction over time
The student's situation is identified as a product problem or a process problem. A product problem may be addressed with a source of information, often within the library collection. A process problem, however, is more complex and needs to be addressed in a holistic, ongoing way.
Process intervention that continues throughout the full duration of the information search process not only guides students in one specific research assignment but also establishes transferable process skills. (Kuhlthau, Zones, n.p.)
Process Intervention Strategies
Collaborating When the librarian takes on a collaborative role as an interested participant in the project, process intervention is the natural result.
Continuing intervention addresses evolving information problems rather than queries that can be answered in a single incident with one source.
Conversations encourage students to discuss ideas in the information encountered as the information search progresses aiding them to form their own perspective of a topic.
Charting intervention is effective for visually presenting a large amount of information in a compact way. It is particularly helpful for guiding students in formulating ideas and for presenting the complete information search process to them.
Composing Counselors may recommend that students keep research journals in which they record ideas, questions, and connections as they progress through their search (Kuhlthau, Zones, n.p.)
One of the college graduates who had been exposed to the process approach to information skills in high school noted that he was better prepared for college research assignments than other students. (Kuhlthau, Zones, n.p.)
The "seven" are questions instead of another crazy acronym.
Is there much research or evidence to support this model?
I was not able to find a lot of literature about Savvy Seven. A database search and a web search brought back very little information on this model. I was unable to find suggested ages (although to me this seems appropriate for a wide range of students). One of the benefits of a model like ISP is that it has been studied and written about for years. Researchers have confirmed (or not) what it can do for students. Other authors have given ideas for implementation. That is not the case with Savvy Seven, which is a drawback.
Again - what really sets this model apart? The series of steps in the process are essentially the same as in other models.
I don't know really anything else about this model.
Savvy Seven's creators have also developed an "information skill lesson plan of unit template" that could be helpful. Completing this document would spur the librarian or teacher to look at which information skills are being integrated, how they are being assessed, and the roles of the classroom teacher and the librarian. If this framework was adopted school-wide and a similar document was used, it could be a regular reminder of the need for teacher/librarian collaboration, particularly on inquiry lessons (Miller and Champlin).
What is the rationale for this model?
Rationale - authors synthesized what students need to master 21st-Century Skills (building background knowledge, finding good resources, gathering information, using it to create a product, share, and reflect). They have worked this process into their Savvy Seven Model. (Champlin and Miller).
Are the authors still promoting this research model? Why is it not being written about more?
What are the steps in this research model? How does it differ from other approaches?
My partner has listed the steps below. The steps are essentially the same as in other research models (Big6, for example). A bonus is that they are worded as questions, which I think is very easy for a student to understand and follow (and teachers who may not have had much training in research methods) (Miller and Champlin).
How do you teach this model?
Champlin and Miller say that only one or two of the model's steps should be addressed in a lesson. Teach in chunks, but at least once a year students should go through the entire process. They also note that assessment should focus not only on the product but on the process (Champlin and Miller).
Have the authors published specific examples of how this model has been implemented successfully?
How is the model implemented?
Champlin and Miller have also written about how to incorporate Web 2.0 tools into the steps of the Savvy Seven. According to them, creating successful student learning is a combination of addressing the Standards for the 21st Century, using Web 2.0 Tools that engage today's students, and using a quality research model (theirs) (Champlin and Miller).
Is a particular age range targeted?
As stated above, I could not find a specific age range that this model is targeted toward, but to me it seems appropriate for older elementary through college ages.
My sum-up: Savvy Seven is a research model developed by Connie Champlin and Nancy Miller as a way to teach the 21st-Century inquiry skills described by AASL. Rather than a completely new model, this almost seems like a different way to present the usual steps for inquiry (such as Big 6 or ISP). Instead of statements, the steps in the process are formulated as questions (in fact, the savvy Seven logo states "It's all in the questions!"). The questions are stated in a clear, easy-to-understand language which makes it very student-friendly. The clarity of the model could also benefit teachers who are reinforcing/co-teaching inquiry, but may not have much background with the process. Whereas the complexity of other models (again, ISP) make them more appropriate for high school or college, Savvy Seven takes a similar set of steps and makes them potentially easier to grasp for middle school and even elementary aged students. One major drawback is a lack of research literature. I was unable to find research specific to this model. There also did not appear to be much in the way of suggestions regarding implementation of this model.
Pre-writing for A.2.4 - K-W-L-Q for Inquiry Learning
Cummings in green
De Angelis in brown
Inquiry Process 2: Savvy 7
Know
Want to Learn
Learn
Further Questions
I have never heard of Savvy 7 and have no prior knowledge of it.
I want to learn as much as I can about Savvy 7 given that I know almost nothing.
What is the question: create a 'smart' or investigative question
(Miller and Champlin, n.p.)
How often do teachers actually use S7?
One of many models of inquiry.
What are the seven steps?
What resources should I use: quality primary and secondary sources
(Miller and Champlin, n.p.)
How does S7 compare to other inquiry models?
Are all seven steps essential, or are there seven because it sounds good?
How do I find the information: technical and 'thoughtful' literacy skills needed; also synonyms, antonyms, Boolean logic
(Miller and Champlin, n.p.)
What grades is S7 geared toward? There seem to be some advanced skillset needed.
How do I gather the information: record / save info with full citations
(Miller and Champlin, n.p.)
What are 'thoughtful' literacy skills?
Which information do I use: critical examination of information; is it current, valid, credible?
(Miller and Champlin, n.p.)
Why is find, gather, and choose info three separate steps when organize, synthesize, and communicate all jammed into one step? I think the info steps could have been combined better.
How do I share what I learned: organize, synthesize, and communicate findings
(Miller and Champlin, n.p.)
Is evaluation self-reflection only or is evaluation also done by peers and teacher?
How do I evaluate my work: covers process and product; rubric use; answer the question; good sources; conclusion supported by evidence
Montiel-Overall, Patricia and Kim Grimes. "Teachers and librarians collaborating on inquiry-based science instruction: A longitudinal study." Library & Information Science Research 35.1 (2013): 41-53. Web. 14 February 2014.
Chen, Lin Ching and Kuo, Mei-Shwu. "Effectiveness Of First-Grade Information Literacy Instruction." Journal Of Educational Media & Library Sciences 50.1 (2012): 41-74. Library & Information Science Source. Web. 19 Feb. 2014.
...teachers' lack of awareness of librarians' role as instructional partners (Montiel-Overall and Grimes 41).
Information Literacy is not just about operating computers. It contains two ascpects: Inquiry Process and Scopes (Chen and Kuo 67)
High stakes testing in elementary schools has resulted in a culture of fact recitation rather than problem solving and higher order thinking (Montiel-Overall and Grimes 42).
Only through the systematic integrated information literacy instruction from elementary level through high schools..., students' information literacy can be developed (Chen and Kuo 68).
TLC was not intuitive (Montiel-Overall and Grimes 45).
...it is evident that designing a series of information literacy instruction from first grade through sixth grade is necessary and urgent (Chen and Kuo 68).
...during the first year, collaborative planning became easier and more efficient (Montiel-Overall and Grimes 46).
Information literacy instruction can be taught systematically from first grade (Chen and Kuo 68).
Participants recognized that co-planning and co-teaching allowed them to engage in instructional activities that could not be carried out by one person (Montiel-Overall and Grimes 46).
Teachers...began to see that librarians could be helpful in teaching lessons, building vocabulary, and expanding what students learned before, during, and after...activites (Montiel-Overall and Grimes 46).
...jointly planned lessons resulted in sharing materials (Montiel-Overall and Grimes 46).
The library was perceived as an extension of the classroom (Montiel-Overall and Grimes 46).
Participants experienced increased motivation...and increased interest by students (Montiel-Overall and Grimes 46).
students' benchmark science scores improved (Montiel-Overall and Grimes 47).
Teachers and librarians were also challenged by less-than-supportive administrators (Montiel-Overall and Grimes 48).
Teachers and principals...were not aware of 21st century information literacy standards or of librarians' responsibility to collaborate with classroom teachers on instruction (Montiel-Overall and Grimes 48).
school library professionals must become more active in helping educators change their preception of librarians by raising awareness about information literacy standards and high end TLC as a way to bolster student achievement...(Montiel-Overall and Grimes 48).
Additional readings:
In "Information Process Models", Ken Haycock gives support for inquiry models such as the ones describers above: "An information process model...fosters the development of research, problem-solving, and metacognitive skills through the collaboration of classroom teacher and teacher-librarian. These concise models inform student of the problem-solving process and provide context for the assignment. When young researchers understand an information process model, they can comprehend the extent of the task facing them and the necessary strategies to complete it. When teachers and students understand an information process model, they use common vocabulary to clarify terminology and label behaviors...A school-wide information process model allows students to gradually develop expert use patterns that enable them to reduce reliance on the scaffold and to ouse the model in different contexts, both in and out of school" (Haycock).
Stripling states it nicely: Inquiry is “a process of learning that is driven by questioning, thoughtful investigating, making sense of information, and developing new understandings…The goal of inquiry is not the accumulation of information; it is the exploration of significant questions and deep learning.”
Berger: “…active, rather than passive, learners are better able to understand complex material and can more effectively transfer information and concepts learned in one setting to the process of solving problems encountered in another.” This is what we are trying to do with students through inquiry.
Berger, Pam. "Student Inquiry And Web 2.0." School Library Monthly 26.5 (2010): 14-17. Library, Information Science & Technology Abstracts with Full Text. Web. 4 Aug. 2012. Haycock, Ken. "Information Process Models." Teacher Librarian 32.1 (2004): 34. Academic Search Complete. Web. 22 Feb. 2014. Stripling, Barbara. "Inquiry: Inquiring Minds Want To Know." School Library Media Activities Monthly 25.1 (2008): 50-52. Web. 23 Feb. 2014.
16 FEB 2014 (Google doc conversation)
Hi Donnie! It’s Marie… lol Good lord I’m finally here. So sorry about the delay!!! Gosh, I now have four email addys for you! Glad you made it finally! Thank you! None of those emails were receiving an invite, then when I did receive the last one, it said I needed approval. Crazy! I had trouble with my last partner getting into my wiki. Have you tried getting into my wiki yet? Also, you need to pick a color. And I don’t mind typing at the same time as you. Ok how about this? Yes I did try to get into the Wiki this morning. I was not able to edit. Okay, I’ll work on that some more later. Maybe a shade darker green? Gotcha. What about the KWLQ prewrite GD? Never mind. I’ll just go ahead and reinvite you right now.
From the AS: The goals of this persuasive presentation assignment are to increase your understanding of inquiry-based learning and other research models that are used in school libraries and classrooms today and to practice giving a persuasive presentation.
I guess some tasks that we should accomplish today are:
~setting a synchronous work schedule
~choosing which two inquiry models we will look at initially. I reviewed 8Ws in LS 5333, so that’s out.
~decide who our audience is. Some choices from the AS: students, teachers, administrators, parents, or other school librarian colleagues
I suggest the use of both the wiki and GD. When we feel the need to get together for synchronous collaboration, we use the GD for real time 'conversations' and copy / paste into the wiki . Yes, this is what I was thinking as well. I def prefer Google docs for real-time discussion but I was also thinking we could cut and paste into the Wiki. Roger. The only issue that comes up is the spreadsheet colors get lost when pasting. I’ll take care of it when the time comes. Sounds good.
When the bright idea fairy visits us in the middle of the night and we want to do asynchronous collaboration, we use the discussion tool on the wiki site, as requested.
I’ll go with what you think is best. FYI, from this assignment’s rubric: Note: Wiki-based discussions can include a phone log and notes on the conversation, a chat log archive, an email trail that includes dates, times, and main topics of conversation or other means BUT any and all of these must be documented on the a wiki page or on the discussion tab in Wikispaces and must show rich negotiations in order to earn full points.
Also from the rubric: Consulted page shows that the partnership investigated this topic BEYOND the resources provided in LS5443. At least five such works were cited or consulted.
I found two research based articles, one each by Montiel and Power, about inquiry while looking for the other project. If you can find two more original articles, our fifth source can be a website.
I will definitely find at least two more articles. So, what are you thinking about as far as inquiry models. I was looking at them this morning and my tops were probably iSearch, ISP and maybe Savvy 7. I’m completely open. I have no experience with any of them. They are all three models that she mentions in the module intro (where we read about at least four). I was kind of hoping to get to do Big 6 since they use it at my school, but I’m afraid to do it. Okay, that was already a week ago and I’ve forgotten...In the discussion board, I believe, she said we can do the Big 6 as one of the two we look at for comparison purposes only. We CANNOT use B6 for the actual presentation. That was what I understood from reading the assignment. Roger. WEll, we can do two independent models for the project and you can research B6 on your own, just to be safe. AGREED! Okay, let me take a gander at the three you mentioned right quick. Sounds good. Okay, duh...is this on the pbworks wiki or BB? PB Works, I believe.
Here were my initial thoughts:
iSearch - I appreciate that it is short and sweet. Those long acronyms seem ridiculous to me. Kids aren’t going to remember all of that. It also seems pretty flexible.
ISP - interesting that it not only talks about the inquiry steps, but also the affective part of inquiry. Not sure exactly how that fits in, but still very interesting. Also like the discussion of “the point where things break down” and “the point of intervention”.
Savvy 7 - like the questions rather than acronym (I apparently have an issue), also they put the librarian as part of the process
WEll, I can’t seem to locate it. Moving on, based on your descriptions, how about ISP and Savvy 7, since it includes the librarian. Really, I have no preference...if you have your heart set on something, I’m okay with that. They are all new to me, so I am in the same boat. I think that sounds good - we can plan on ISP and Savvy 7 and then if you read about another one that you would like to do instead, that is fine with me (we could always do an extra if we wanted :) )
Ha, ha overachiever! lol That’s right! Haha
Okay, one task down. Do we want to choose our audience? I think that would be great, with a little wiggle room just in case our research points to a particular group working better. I would probably tend toward teachers or admin, but anything is fine with me. I was thinking admin as well since they are the ones who mandate a particular use? Isn’t that right? That was my thinking, exactly. It also seems beneficial to have a school adopt one particular model so it can be reinforced in different grades and classes! Absolutely!
boom! two tasks down! Cha kow!
Working calendar for synchronous discussion? What do you think? Other than work, I am pretty open. The project is due 07 MAR. That’s about 2.5 weeks. No that is fine. Is meeting synchronously twice weekly too much? Even if only for catch-up and reset. WE can always do more, rather we MUST do more asynchronously on the wiki also. That sounds good to me. Having small chunks to accomplish before would also be helpful, maybe. Yes. I meet with mktg group on Mondays. How about Tues / Thr? or is that too close together? I think that should be fine. Might not be a lot done between Tues and Thurs discussion, but we can always touch base again over the weekend.Yes, I’m flexible and we can adjust fire as needed. FYI, I have drill 28 Feb-2 Mar. I will be out of pocket pretty much completely those days. We’re going to Ft Hood for an exercise and usually no electronics allowed. No problem. How does 8:30 PM sound? That sounds fine. If it looks like it will be a problem, I will email you, but it shouldn’t be. Any ideas about how you would like to divide up the work? I think we can both look at both models and make our own notes on the GD KWLQ, or do you want to take one each? For sure, we should each read our own articles / websites and take notes. That sounds fine - more beneficial to find out about both than just one. I hope there is plenty of information out there on both of those models. That might be another consideration. True. Well, if by Tues we think they are too thin, we can pick something else. Sounds good! Okay, let me summarize our schedule below. I must write it down or it won’t happen.
Tues 18 FEB @ 8:30 PM Thr 20 FEB Tues 25 FEB Thr 27 FEB Tues 04 MAR Thr 06 MAR (hopefully done by then; maybe spell check, etc. Fri 07 MAR project due
Asynchronous work on wiki completed at will.That sounds good to me. And we will be cutting and pasting this discussion into the Wiki discussion also, right? I’ll paste the entire discussion. One note: on 20 FEB, it will be closer to 8:45, is that okay? I’m coming from another meeting a few blocks away. Sure that is no problem. So by next Tuesday we will have done a little early research and posted a bit to the KWLQ charts? Roger. Any ideas on what Web 2.0 tool you’d like to use for this? Not really. It would be nice to have something like Prezi where we could embed videos (maybe a jing screencast kind of thing), infographic, etc. Not sure Prezi is the best choice, I don’t know. Sounds like you are much more experienced in Web 2.0 than I am. WE have some time to think about it. That sounds good. We can think about the best ways to present the material we find and then choose the best tool. Yes, that’s about what the rubric says, too. That’s probably where I heard it :) Would you mind sending me a direct link to our two models? I could search for hours trying to find them.
To summarize:
~ synchronous work schedule :
Tues 18 FEB @ 8:30 PM Thr 20 FEB Tues 25 FEB Thr 27 FEB Tues 04 MAR Thr 06 MAR (hopefully done by then; maybe spell check, etc. Fri 07 MAR project due
I think there will be plenty of info on ISP. Savvy 7 is the iffy one. Thank you so much! Anything else for today? You are most welcome. Pleasure working with you! I can’t think of anything else :) No problem, I’ll take care of it and paste into the wiki. So, see you on Tues 8:30? Yes, sounds good. And, whenever you get a chance, please try to add me to the Wiki again. I had a problem with that last project - the email finally arrived. Roger. I’ll resend to all four of your emails. If it doesn’t work, we’ll just use yours instead. OK thank you very much! Have a great rest of your weekend! The same to you!
_
18 FEB (Google doc conversation)
Good evening! Hi. How’s your week going so far? Fine, how about you? Fine - busy but good. It wasn’t a bad day but I feel like I could go to sleep already :) Well, we don’t have to take too long. I was with the marketing folks for two hours last night...and we have the rest of the semester to do that project. HOLY SMOKES! I am meeting with those folks tomorrow night and I sure hope it doesn’t take two hours!!!! We have one chatty cathy...I’m more into short statements. Agreed! OK how can you shorten that? lol “gree”? :) silly Anyway, I see you got quite a bit done for the KWLQ. I only did a little and it’s on the GD. It looks like a lot but I really only read a couple of articles, they were just good ones. There is a lot of stuff about ISP (that’s the good part), but it is kind of convoluted (that is the not-so-good part). It was interesting, though. Sorry, I’m glancing at the AS. No problem. Also looking at the rubric. When we get there, we will also need to use the discussion feature on all three pages. I also need to link the prewrite and storyboard to the final page. My other group did that and it looks much neater and is easier to navigate. I will have to see that after you do it - I’m not sure exactly what you mean. In my head, the PP Final page will only have links: one to the prewrite page, one to the storyboard page, and one to our voki or whatever we use for the presentation. Am I on the right track? Yes I think I see what you are saying. We will give her the link to the main page which will then link to the three component pages. Or else I’m completely wrong :) I think that’s good. I don’t know whether you’ve had a chance to check out Savvy Seven yet but there isn’t really much info (at least not that I saw). See what you think and if you think there isn’t enough, we can change. I’ve perused the website, but not done any research for articles on S7. Remember, after KWLQ of both, we discard one and only focus on the other. If S7 doesn’t appeal to us, it can be the discard. Absolutely, I just wanted to make sure there was enough info to do the KWLQ sufficiently. Was S7 on her list of choices? Well, I don’t think there was really a list that went with the assignment. There was a list in the module and you were to read about at least 4. It was one of the models on that list. I would say that she is well aware of all the models, especially any that she is recommending us to examine. She’ll know that it’s a little thin. Yes that is true. I have a question - I am looking over the rubric also and for the prewriting part she says “both partners contribute to the KWLQ and share their notes.” So we are to have notes in addition to the KWL? I think we can put down some notes from our articles that support inquiry learning on the prewrite chart. I’m thinking we will need to trim them into sound bites to use during the presentation. I’m also reading on the rubric that we need a sample project… Yes I saw that too. Basically, I think any notes I take about a model could be recorded in the L column, but I may add a few outside of the chart just to be safe (sharing notes). And yes, I agree about trimming or putting into our own words - the important ideas. And it says “sample projects”. Oh brother...plural lol We can totally come up with a couple of inquiry project ideas.
From the DB, Crissy Casey:
I understand that we are making a persuasive presentation based on an inquiry model that our group chooses. However, I don't understand what we are trying to persuade them to believe. If we target our presentation towards administrators, for example, are we trying to argue that our chosen inquiry model is the best and most effective? Or, are we persuading them to see the benefits of this inquiry model to student success? I watched the Collaborative Session from this past week but am still a little confused about the purpose of the persuasion.
Response: What do you think? Since you are sharing a specific inquiry process, you will definitely be persuading your audience that the one you are presenting is the best for your students. On the other hand, if your audience has not even committed to the inquiry process as necessary for 21st-century students, then you will have to include that pitch in your presentation, too. Your question is one for you and your partner to answer...
So far, that is the only question asked about this project. I think you are right on the money - we can talk briefly about why inquiry is the way to go and then argue the benefits of this particular model. (Whichever one we choose). Okay, so I’m a little behind you right now. Do we want to reconvene on Thursday? It is up to you, but I can tell you that with meeting with my other group tomorrow night (hopefully not for two hours), I probably won’t have much completed between now and then. I also have a major project coming due in another class. When would be a better time? Maybe Saturday afternoon or early evening? And what other class are you taking? Public Libraries. I might actually use some of my Sat to visit central branch for this project. What about Sunday? I could probably do Sunday night but I am meeting with a friend for most of the day and I’m not sure exactly when the beginning and end will be. Ok, how about Saturday 6 PM? That sounds perfect. Wonderful. If we (and by we I mean I) can get a lot done asynchronously before then, it should be a short discussion just to compare notes and wonder about the next step. Yes - that sounds good. I will try to have prewriting research done (or mainly done) at that point. Alrighty then, shall we say adieu? Or do we need to talk about other aspects of the project? I don’t think so. If we can get the background work done in the next while, we can decide upon one to focus on and then look more closely at how exactly we want to present it. :) ‘gree. Night then… Good night and I’ll talk to you Saturday! Good luck with your other project as well. Thanks. I’ll paste this in unless you want to. Don’t care. I’ll do it. Whichever you prefer! Ok thanks very much. Bye!
___
22 FEB (Google doc conversation)
Have we made a decision between S7 and ISP as far as which product we are going to sell to our administrators?
I def agree with you that ISP would be the best choice. I did find another presentation on Savvy Seven today that gave some more information, but there is a lot more about ISP to discuss, in my opinion. Also, I know we had said we were going to target administrators and I am still fine with that, but I was also thinking about librarians. The model is pretty complex and I think that the librarian is really going to be the one who will have to be involved and driving the model at their school. This isn’t one that is going to be easy to give a quick overview to teachers and say ‘ go ahead. I was thinking about maybe something to the effect of “Here’s What ISP can do for you” and then we could talk about the different benefits - decreased anxiety, inquiry steps, etc etc. That was a finger-full.
Okay, so you want to change our audience to fellow librarians?Well, I don’t know - what do you think? I am fine either way. I think that’s fine. Is there a time when all librarians in a district get together? This is when such a presentation and training would take place. In my district we do have meeting of all the librarians once or twice a semester and then our middle school librarians meet monthly. Okay, so this would be like train the trainer...or persuade the persuaders? The head district librarian sells this method to the other librarians, the librarian go to their schools and persuade the teachers incrementally how wonderful this model is? Is that what you’re thinking? And we’re the head librarian? Yes - something along those lines, yes. That sounds very realistic to me, something that you would actually see, the dissemination of a new model and new information. Yes I agree. It was interesting - one of the studies showed that just a 30 minute presentation at the beginning of a project decreased student anxiety about the research process. So even though they couldn’t have really learned the steps, understanding the affective part of the process put them more at ease. Okay, librarians as audience it is. I think I need to flesh out my notes more thoroughly then. Yes it is not an easy one, for sure. I think that was why I was thinking librarians being the ones to sell it, it wouldn’t make an easy presentation to an administrator. Regarding the KWLQ, I’m just about done. I may find one more article about inquiry in general - maybe another one that supports the use of a model - but I think I am pretty done with the other part.
I’m thinking we need to start discussing what tool we will use for the presentation and also about sample projects. Yes. I was writing down some notes this afternoon as I was eating fried okra in Cotton Patch Yum!! Yes and that mac and cheese was fantastic! Rabbit Platter. Yes comfort food is good. They serve hare? I’m serious. Or do you mean salad? My husband calls it ‘grass’. lol. No that is the vegetable plate. :) And there you go! It was some delicious grass! So here were a couple of ideas I was thinking maybe…
I was trying to think of a tool that we could both work on separate parts of the puzzle and then piece them together. One possibility is Prezi - used a lot these days, but could do the trick. Maybe the title could be something like “What ISP Can Do For You” or your school or students or whatever. Then we could have sections on the background and benefits - “About ISP”, “Help Your Student Feel More At Ease About Research”, “Give Your Teachers a Framework to Teach Inquiry” - my wordings are bad but you get the idea. Yes, those are good ideas. I have made a prezi before, so I am not a complete virgin. I came up with something, of course I think it’s the greatest since sliced bread. I told my other group and we will probably discuss on Monday. If we dont’ use it for that, we can use it for this if we want: COLLABORATION MAKES LEARNING EXPONENTIAL. I think that is great! Sliced bread great? jk lol Yes! I am going to be struggling with slogan ideas for that project - yours is fantastic. WEll, we already picked one that is pretty good, so maybe it’ll work for this PP. I’ll let you know. Ok that sounds good. Have you ever used Smore? Uh, I eat smores… As does anyone who isn’t insane. Smore is a little bit like Glogster - it makes these cool looking flyers but that it another possibility. You create the headline and subheading, then add different components - I was imagining it like tabs - one tab for each of our selling points. Then a couple of tabs for our lesson plan ideas. The tabs could have an embedded video, or an infographic or whatever. Also, an infographic would be cool for the process and also even a flowchart to show our lesson plans (like a progession of steps).
I opened the smores and it looks good. Very clean. I think it’s a good idea. The only drawback is that I don’t think there is a way to partner edit, although if we shared a username and password that would probably accomplish the same thing. I say let’s use it. Do you want to set up a skeleton? Yes I will do that before we meet again. Also check out easel.ly - that might be a good one to create our infographic(s). Ooh, those are awesome...Good choice. I haven’t even used either of them, so it will be good experience. Well, should we start expanding your basic outline now or do you want to work some on our own? Well hows about….we individually brainstorm our top selling points for the assignment. We will share them through the discussion feature :) Then the next time we talk (Tuesday?) we could decide which ones are going to make the cut, who is going to do what, and maybe what formats we might want to use (like text or a screencast or whatever). You’re the man with the plan...That sounds great. Ok cool. Okay, so Tuesday 8:30 with our brainstorm of top selling points.
Yes - have a great evening and I will talk to you later! Ok, bye!
Pre-writing for A.2.4 - K-W-L-Q for Inquiry Learning
PP Final
PP_Storyboard
LS 5443
Persuasive Presentation
Donnie Cummings in green.
Christine De Angelis in brown.
Information Seeking Process (Kuhlthau)
1) Initiation - thinking about assignment (uncertainty and apprehension)
2) Selection - what do I know, what do I need to find out (confusion but later optimism)
3) Exploration - explore topic to help find focus (confusion and doubt) (She calls this "the dip")
4) Formulation - settle on focus and develop personal perspective (if focus - optimistic and confident; if no focus, completion is unlikely)Kuhlthau says development of focus (the student's guiding idea) is pivotal.
5) Collection - bathing info (increased interest and confidence)
6) Presentation - Prepare to present and share (relief or disappointment)
In each of these stages, ISP looks at three areas of experience:
1) Affective (feelings)
2) Cognitive (Thoughts)
3) Physical (actions) ("Information Search Process")
The steps in Kuhlthau's ISP were originally based on Kelly, but were supported by a number of studies looking at high school and college students. These studies confirmed the stages students go through in the information seeking process. Kuhlthau's six stage model was developed as a result. Other studies also reinforced the affective stages that students go through during the process ("Information Search Process: A Summary").
My sum-up: ISP was developed by Kuhlthau as a constructivist approach - using their prior knowledge, students build meaning themselves rather than just being given facts by the teacher. The inquiry process Kuhlthau uses is nothing too shocking - most inquiry models go through similar steps, though they may have different names and divisions. Perhaps the most interesting thing about the ISP approach is that it takes into account the feelings students (and adults) typically go through during the research process. These often involve confusion and anxiety. Kuhlthau's work and Kracker's study suggest that when students understand that these feelings are a normal part of the process, they may feel more comfortable and less anxious, more satisfied with the process.ISP has not been made into a catchy acronym and is not especially "user-friendly". Kulhthau states that this isn't a scripted approach. This suggests to me that multiple sessions and practices would be necessary for students to learn or internalize the steps and behaviors used here. Referenced in the Kracker article (I could not find a full-text copy of the original) Vakkari later grouped the 6 steps into three broader headings: prefocus, focus, and postfocus, with a major decision present at the end of each stage. This division might make things a bit more manageable (or at least it feels more organized to me!). The Reynolds paper describes their implementation of the ISP process as taking place over a full year, with different mini-goals throughout to help ensure students are progressing appropriately. Some other models (those catchy acronyms :)) would appear to better lend themselves to "whole school adoption". They are easier for students to remember and perhaps easier for teachers to learn and implement (conversely, these models might not be as deep as ISP, either). For whole-school adoption of ISP to work, I think the librarian would really have to be a part of the planning and implementation of most (if not all) research projects. Having a standardized set of steps and tasks (as in Reynolds) could also be effective.
Kracker, Jacqueline. "Research Anxiety and Students' Perceptions of Research: An Experiment. Part I. Effect of Teaching Kuhlthau's ISP Model." Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 53.4 (2002): 282-294. Business Source Complete. Web. 17 Feb. 2014.
Kuhlthau, Carol. "Information Search Process." Rutgers.edu. Rutgers, Oct. 2013. Web. 17 Feb. 2014. <http://comminfo.rutgers.edu/~kuhlthau/information_search_process.htm>.
Kuhlthau, Carol C. "Information Search Process: A Summary Of Research And Implications For School Library Media Programs." School Library Media Quarterly 18.1 (1989): 19-25. Web. 1 Mar. 2014. <http://www.ala.org/aasl/aaslpubsandjournals/slmrb/editorschoiceb/infopower/slctkuhlthau2>
Reynolds, Helen. "The Information Search Process (The ISP) And The Research Essay. How One School Library Supports Learning By Using The ISP As The Framework For The Extended Essay." IASL Conference Reports (2010): 1-5. Library & Information Science Source. Web. 17 Feb. 2014.
Shannon, Donna. "Kuhlthau's Information Search Process." School Library Monthly 19.1 (2002): 19-23. Education Source. Web. 17 Feb 2014.
understanding and feelings of uncertainty and apprehension are
common.
(Kuhlthau, ISP, n.p.)
Feelings: apprehension, uncertainty
(Callison and Lamb, n.p.)
uncertainty often gives way to a brief sense of optimism and a
readiness to begin the search.
(Kuhlthau, ISP, n.p.)
Feelings: confusion, sometimes anxiety, brief elation, anticipation
(Callison and Lamb, n.p.)
uncertainty, confusion, and doubt frequently increase and people find
themselves “in the dip” of confidence.
(Kuhlthau, ISP, n.p.)
Feelings: confusion, uncertainty, doubt, sometimes threat
(Callison and Lamb, n.p.)
(Kuhlthau, ISP, n.p.)
Feelings: optimism, confidence in ability to complete task
(Callison and Lamb, n.p.)
uncertainty subsides as interest and involvement deepens.
(Kuhlthau, ISP, n.p.)
Feelings: realization of extensive work to be done, confidence in ability to complete task, increased interest
(Callison and Lamb, n.p.)
person to explain his or her learning to others or in someway put
the learning to use.
(Kuhlthau, ISP, n.p.)
Feelings: sense of relief, sometimes satisfaction, sometimes disappointment
(Callison and Lamb, n.p.)
Feelings: sense of accomplishment or sense of disappointment
(Callison and Lamb, n.p.)
(Kuhlthau, ISP, n.p.)
(Kuhlthau, ISP, n.p.)
(Kuhlthau, ISP, n.p.)
(Kuhlthau, ISP, n.p.)
(Kuhlthau, ISP, n.p.)
(Kuhlthau, ISP, n.p.)
In zone 2 (Z2) through zone 5 (Z5) the problem is diagnosed through an interview to elicit a problem statement and background information: task, interest, time, and availability.
Z1: Librarian acts as organizer; no instruction
Z2: Librarian acts as lecturer; orientation and overview provided
Z3: Librarian acts as instructor; one type of source
Z4: Librarian acts as tutor; strategy instruction with a variety of sources
Z5: Librarian acts as counselor; holistic process instruction over time
The student's situation is identified as a product problem or a process problem. A product problem may be addressed with a source of information, often within the library collection. A process problem, however, is more complex and needs to be addressed in a holistic, ongoing way.
Process intervention that continues throughout the full duration of the information search process not only guides students in one specific research assignment but also establishes transferable process skills.
(Kuhlthau, Zones, n.p.)
Collaborating When the librarian takes on a collaborative role as an interested participant in the project, process intervention is the natural result.
Continuing intervention addresses evolving information problems rather than queries that can be answered in a single incident with one source.
Conversations encourage students to discuss ideas in the information encountered as the information search progresses aiding them to form their own perspective of a topic.
Charting intervention is effective for visually presenting a large amount of information in a compact way. It is particularly helpful for guiding students in formulating ideas and for presenting the complete information search process to them.
Composing Counselors may recommend that students keep research journals
in which they record ideas, questions, and connections as they progress through their search
(Kuhlthau, Zones, n.p.)
information skills in high school noted that he was better prepared for college research
assignments than other students.
(Kuhlthau, Zones, n.p.)
Savvy Seven Research Model (Miller and Champlin)
Champlin, Connie and Nancy Miller. "Engaging Kids in Research with Web 2.0 Tools." 2009. PDF File of a Powerpoint Presentation. Web. 22 Feb. 2014. <http://painlessguidetoresearch.pbworks.com/f/Engaging+Kids+in+Research+w+Web+2.0+Tools.pdf>
Miller, Nancy and Connie Champlin. The Savvy Seven Research Model. n.d. Web. 15 February 2014. <http://www.lmcsource.com/pages/savvy7.html>.
(Miller and Champlin, n.p.)
(Miller and Champlin, n.p.)
(Miller and Champlin, n.p.)
(Miller and Champlin, n.p.)
(Miller and Champlin, n.p.)
(Miller and Champlin, n.p.)
(Miller and Champlin, n.p.)
Additional readings:
In "Information Process Models", Ken Haycock gives support for inquiry models such as the ones describers above: "An information process model...fosters the development of research, problem-solving, and metacognitive skills through the collaboration of classroom teacher and teacher-librarian. These concise models inform student of the problem-solving process and provide context for the assignment. When young researchers understand an information process model, they can comprehend the extent of the task facing them and the necessary strategies to complete it. When teachers and students understand an information process model, they use common vocabulary to clarify terminology and label behaviors...A school-wide information process model allows students to gradually develop expert use patterns that enable them to reduce reliance on the scaffold and to ouse the model in different contexts, both in and out of school" (Haycock).
Stripling states it nicely: Inquiry is “a process of learning that is driven by questioning, thoughtful investigating, making sense of information, and developing new understandings…The goal of inquiry is not the accumulation of information; it is the exploration of significant questions and deep learning.”
Berger: “…active, rather than passive, learners are better able to understand complex material and can more effectively transfer information and concepts learned in one setting to the process of solving problems encountered in another.” This is what we are trying to do with students through inquiry.
Berger, Pam. "Student Inquiry And Web 2.0." School Library Monthly 26.5 (2010): 14-17. Library, Information Science & Technology Abstracts with Full Text. Web. 4 Aug. 2012.
Haycock, Ken. "Information Process Models." Teacher Librarian 32.1 (2004): 34. Academic Search Complete. Web. 22 Feb. 2014.
Stripling, Barbara. "Inquiry: Inquiring Minds Want To Know." School Library Media Activities Monthly 25.1 (2008): 50-52. Web. 23 Feb. 2014.
16 FEB 2014 (Google doc conversation)
Hi Donnie! It’s Marie… lol Good lord I’m finally here. So sorry about the delay!!! Gosh, I now have four email addys for you! Glad you made it finally! Thank you! None of those emails were receiving an invite, then when I did receive the last one, it said I needed approval. Crazy! I had trouble with my last partner getting into my wiki. Have you tried getting into my wiki yet? Also, you need to pick a color. And I don’t mind typing at the same time as you. Ok how about this? Yes I did try to get into the Wiki this morning. I was not able to edit. Okay, I’ll work on that some more later. Maybe a shade darker green? Gotcha. What about the KWLQ prewrite GD? Never mind. I’ll just go ahead and reinvite you right now.
From the AS: The goals of this persuasive presentation assignment are to increase your understanding of inquiry-based learning and other research models that are used in school libraries and classrooms today and to practice giving a persuasive presentation.
I guess some tasks that we should accomplish today are:
~setting a synchronous work schedule
~choosing which two inquiry models we will look at initially. I reviewed 8Ws in LS 5333, so that’s out.
~decide who our audience is. Some choices from the AS: students, teachers, administrators, parents, or other school librarian colleagues
I suggest the use of both the wiki and GD. When we feel the need to get together for synchronous collaboration, we use the GD for real time 'conversations' and copy / paste into the wiki . Yes, this is what I was thinking as well. I def prefer Google docs for real-time discussion but I was also thinking we could cut and paste into the Wiki. Roger. The only issue that comes up is the spreadsheet colors get lost when pasting. I’ll take care of it when the time comes. Sounds good.
When the bright idea fairy visits us in the middle of the night and we want to do asynchronous collaboration, we use the discussion tool on the wiki site, as requested.
I’ll go with what you think is best. FYI, from this assignment’s rubric: Note: Wiki-based discussions can include a phone log and notes on the conversation, a chat log archive, an email trail that includes dates, times, and main topics of conversation or other means BUT any and all of these must be documented on the a wiki page or on the discussion tab in Wikispaces and must show rich negotiations in order to earn full points.
Also from the rubric: Consulted page shows that the partnership investigated this topic BEYOND the resources provided in LS5443. At least five such works were cited or consulted.
I found two research based articles, one each by Montiel and Power, about inquiry while looking for the other project. If you can find two more original articles, our fifth source can be a website.
I will definitely find at least two more articles. So, what are you thinking about as far as inquiry models. I was looking at them this morning and my tops were probably iSearch, ISP and maybe Savvy 7. I’m completely open. I have no experience with any of them. They are all three models that she mentions in the module intro (where we read about at least four). I was kind of hoping to get to do Big 6 since they use it at my school, but I’m afraid to do it. Okay, that was already a week ago and I’ve forgotten...In the discussion board, I believe, she said we can do the Big 6 as one of the two we look at for comparison purposes only. We CANNOT use B6 for the actual presentation. That was what I understood from reading the assignment. Roger. WEll, we can do two independent models for the project and you can research B6 on your own, just to be safe. AGREED! Okay, let me take a gander at the three you mentioned right quick. Sounds good. Okay, duh...is this on the pbworks wiki or BB? PB Works, I believe.
Here were my initial thoughts:
iSearch - I appreciate that it is short and sweet. Those long acronyms seem ridiculous to me. Kids aren’t going to remember all of that. It also seems pretty flexible.
ISP - interesting that it not only talks about the inquiry steps, but also the affective part of inquiry. Not sure exactly how that fits in, but still very interesting. Also like the discussion of “the point where things break down” and “the point of intervention”.
Savvy 7 - like the questions rather than acronym (I apparently have an issue), also they put the librarian as part of the process
WEll, I can’t seem to locate it. Moving on, based on your descriptions, how about ISP and Savvy 7, since it includes the librarian. Really, I have no preference...if you have your heart set on something, I’m okay with that. They are all new to me, so I am in the same boat. I think that sounds good - we can plan on ISP and Savvy 7 and then if you read about another one that you would like to do instead, that is fine with me (we could always do an extra if we wanted :) )
Ha, ha overachiever! lol That’s right! Haha
Okay, one task down. Do we want to choose our audience? I think that would be great, with a little wiggle room just in case our research points to a particular group working better. I would probably tend toward teachers or admin, but anything is fine with me. I was thinking admin as well since they are the ones who mandate a particular use? Isn’t that right? That was my thinking, exactly. It also seems beneficial to have a school adopt one particular model so it can be reinforced in different grades and classes! Absolutely!
boom! two tasks down! Cha kow!
Working calendar for synchronous discussion? What do you think? Other than work, I am pretty open. The project is due 07 MAR. That’s about 2.5 weeks. No that is fine. Is meeting synchronously twice weekly too much? Even if only for catch-up and reset. WE can always do more, rather we MUST do more asynchronously on the wiki also. That sounds good to me. Having small chunks to accomplish before would also be helpful, maybe. Yes. I meet with mktg group on Mondays. How about Tues / Thr? or is that too close together? I think that should be fine. Might not be a lot done between Tues and Thurs discussion, but we can always touch base again over the weekend.Yes, I’m flexible and we can adjust fire as needed. FYI, I have drill 28 Feb-2 Mar. I will be out of pocket pretty much completely those days. We’re going to Ft Hood for an exercise and usually no electronics allowed. No problem. How does 8:30 PM sound? That sounds fine. If it looks like it will be a problem, I will email you, but it shouldn’t be. Any ideas about how you would like to divide up the work? I think we can both look at both models and make our own notes on the GD KWLQ, or do you want to take one each? For sure, we should each read our own articles / websites and take notes. That sounds fine - more beneficial to find out about both than just one. I hope there is plenty of information out there on both of those models. That might be another consideration. True. Well, if by Tues we think they are too thin, we can pick something else. Sounds good! Okay, let me summarize our schedule below. I must write it down or it won’t happen.
Tues 18 FEB @ 8:30 PM
Thr 20 FEB
Tues 25 FEB
Thr 27 FEB
Tues 04 MAR
Thr 06 MAR (hopefully done by then; maybe spell check, etc.
Fri 07 MAR project due
Asynchronous work on wiki completed at will.That sounds good to me. And we will be cutting and pasting this discussion into the Wiki discussion also, right? I’ll paste the entire discussion. One note: on 20 FEB, it will be closer to 8:45, is that okay? I’m coming from another meeting a few blocks away. Sure that is no problem. So by next Tuesday we will have done a little early research and posted a bit to the KWLQ charts? Roger. Any ideas on what Web 2.0 tool you’d like to use for this? Not really. It would be nice to have something like Prezi where we could embed videos (maybe a jing screencast kind of thing), infographic, etc. Not sure Prezi is the best choice, I don’t know. Sounds like you are much more experienced in Web 2.0 than I am. WE have some time to think about it. That sounds good. We can think about the best ways to present the material we find and then choose the best tool. Yes, that’s about what the rubric says, too. That’s probably where I heard it :) Would you mind sending me a direct link to our two models? I could search for hours trying to find them.
To summarize:
~ synchronous work schedule :
Tues 18 FEB @ 8:30 PM
Thr 20 FEB
Tues 25 FEB
Thr 27 FEB
Tues 04 MAR
Thr 06 MAR (hopefully done by then; maybe spell check, etc.
Fri 07 MAR project due
~Asynchronous work on wiki completed at will
~two inquiry models: ISP & Savvy 7
~our audience: Administrators
__http://www.lmcsource.com/pages/savvy7.html__
__http://virtualinquiry.com/inquiry/ips.htm__
I think there will be plenty of info on ISP. Savvy 7 is the iffy one. Thank you so much! Anything else for today? You are most welcome. Pleasure working with you! I can’t think of anything else :) No problem, I’ll take care of it and paste into the wiki. So, see you on Tues 8:30? Yes, sounds good. And, whenever you get a chance, please try to add me to the Wiki again. I had a problem with that last project - the email finally arrived. Roger. I’ll resend to all four of your emails. If it doesn’t work, we’ll just use yours instead. OK thank you very much! Have a great rest of your weekend! The same to you!
_
18 FEB (Google doc conversation)
Good evening!
Hi. How’s your week going so far? Fine, how about you? Fine - busy but good. It wasn’t a bad day but I feel like I could go to sleep already :) Well, we don’t have to take too long. I was with the marketing folks for two hours last night...and we have the rest of the semester to do that project. HOLY SMOKES! I am meeting with those folks tomorrow night and I sure hope it doesn’t take two hours!!!! We have one chatty cathy...I’m more into short statements. Agreed! OK how can you shorten that? lol “gree”? :) silly
Anyway, I see you got quite a bit done for the KWLQ. I only did a little and it’s on the GD. It looks like a lot but I really only read a couple of articles, they were just good ones. There is a lot of stuff about ISP (that’s the good part), but it is kind of convoluted (that is the not-so-good part). It was interesting, though. Sorry, I’m glancing at the AS. No problem. Also looking at the rubric. When we get there, we will also need to use the discussion feature on all three pages. I also need to link the prewrite and storyboard to the final page. My other group did that and it looks much neater and is easier to navigate. I will have to see that after you do it - I’m not sure exactly what you mean. In my head, the PP Final page will only have links: one to the prewrite page, one to the storyboard page, and one to our voki or whatever we use for the presentation. Am I on the right track? Yes I think I see what you are saying. We will give her the link to the main page which will then link to the three component pages. Or else I’m completely wrong :) I think that’s good. I don’t know whether you’ve had a chance to check out Savvy Seven yet but there isn’t really much info (at least not that I saw). See what you think and if you think there isn’t enough, we can change. I’ve perused the website, but not done any research for articles on S7. Remember, after KWLQ of both, we discard one and only focus on the other. If S7 doesn’t appeal to us, it can be the discard. Absolutely, I just wanted to make sure there was enough info to do the KWLQ sufficiently.
Was S7 on her list of choices? Well, I don’t think there was really a list that went with the assignment. There was a list in the module and you were to read about at least 4. It was one of the models on that list. I would say that she is well aware of all the models, especially any that she is recommending us to examine. She’ll know that it’s a little thin. Yes that is true. I have a question - I am looking over the rubric also and for the prewriting part she says “both partners contribute to the KWLQ and share their notes.” So we are to have notes in addition to the KWL? I think we can put down some notes from our articles that support inquiry learning on the prewrite chart. I’m thinking we will need to trim them into sound bites to use during the presentation. I’m also reading on the rubric that we need a sample project… Yes I saw that too. Basically, I think any notes I take about a model could be recorded in the L column, but I may add a few outside of the chart just to be safe (sharing notes). And yes, I agree about trimming or putting into our own words - the important ideas. And it says “sample projects”. Oh brother...plural lol We can totally come up with a couple of inquiry project ideas.
From the DB, Crissy Casey:
I understand that we are making a persuasive presentation based on an inquiry model that our group chooses. However, I don't understand what we are trying to persuade them to believe. If we target our presentation towards administrators, for example, are we trying to argue that our chosen inquiry model is the best and most effective? Or, are we persuading them to see the benefits of this inquiry model to student success? I watched the Collaborative Session from this past week but am still a little confused about the purpose of the persuasion.
Response:
What do you think?
Since you are sharing a specific inquiry process, you will definitely be persuading your audience that the one you are presenting is the best for your students.
On the other hand, if your audience has not even committed to the inquiry process as necessary for 21st-century students, then you will have to include that pitch in your presentation, too.
Your question is one for you and your partner to answer...
So far, that is the only question asked about this project. I think you are right on the money - we can talk briefly about why inquiry is the way to go and then argue the benefits of this particular model. (Whichever one we choose). Okay, so I’m a little behind you right now. Do we want to reconvene on Thursday? It is up to you, but I can tell you that with meeting with my other group tomorrow night (hopefully not for two hours), I probably won’t have much completed between now and then. I also have a major project coming due in another class. When would be a better time? Maybe Saturday afternoon or early evening? And what other class are you taking? Public Libraries. I might actually use some of my Sat to visit central branch for this project. What about Sunday? I could probably do Sunday night but I am meeting with a friend for most of the day and I’m not sure exactly when the beginning and end will be. Ok, how about Saturday 6 PM? That sounds perfect. Wonderful. If we (and by we I mean I) can get a lot done asynchronously before then, it should be a short discussion just to compare notes and wonder about the next step. Yes - that sounds good. I will try to have prewriting research done (or mainly done) at that point. Alrighty then, shall we say adieu? Or do we need to talk about other aspects of the project? I don’t think so. If we can get the background work done in the next while, we can decide upon one to focus on and then look more closely at how exactly we want to present it. :) ‘gree. Night then… Good night and I’ll talk to you Saturday! Good luck with your other project as well. Thanks. I’ll paste this in unless you want to. Don’t care. I’ll do it. Whichever you prefer! Ok thanks very much. Bye!
___
22 FEB (Google doc conversation)
Have we made a decision between S7 and ISP as far as which product we are going to sell to our administrators?
I def agree with you that ISP would be the best choice. I did find another presentation on Savvy Seven today that gave some more information, but there is a lot more about ISP to discuss, in my opinion. Also, I know we had said we were going to target administrators and I am still fine with that, but I was also thinking about librarians. The model is pretty complex and I think that the librarian is really going to be the one who will have to be involved and driving the model at their school. This isn’t one that is going to be easy to give a quick overview to teachers and say ‘ go ahead. I was thinking about maybe something to the effect of “Here’s What ISP can do for you” and then we could talk about the different benefits - decreased anxiety, inquiry steps, etc etc. That was a finger-full.
Okay, so you want to change our audience to fellow librarians? Well, I don’t know - what do you think? I am fine either way. I think that’s fine. Is there a time when all librarians in a district get together? This is when such a presentation and training would take place. In my district we do have meeting of all the librarians once or twice a semester and then our middle school librarians meet monthly. Okay, so this would be like train the trainer...or persuade the persuaders? The head district librarian sells this method to the other librarians, the librarian go to their schools and persuade the teachers incrementally how wonderful this model is? Is that what you’re thinking? And we’re the head librarian? Yes - something along those lines, yes. That sounds very realistic to me, something that you would actually see, the dissemination of a new model and new information. Yes I agree. It was interesting - one of the studies showed that just a 30 minute presentation at the beginning of a project decreased student anxiety about the research process. So even though they couldn’t have really learned the steps, understanding the affective part of the process put them more at ease. Okay, librarians as audience it is. I think I need to flesh out my notes more thoroughly then. Yes it is not an easy one, for sure. I think that was why I was thinking librarians being the ones to sell it, it wouldn’t make an easy presentation to an administrator. Regarding the KWLQ, I’m just about done. I may find one more article about inquiry in general - maybe another one that supports the use of a model - but I think I am pretty done with the other part.
I’m thinking we need to start discussing what tool we will use for the presentation and also about sample projects. Yes. I was writing down some notes this afternoon as I was eating fried okra in Cotton Patch Yum!! Yes and that mac and cheese was fantastic! Rabbit Platter. Yes comfort food is good. They serve hare? I’m serious. Or do you mean salad? My husband calls it ‘grass’. lol. No that is the vegetable plate. :) And there you go! It was some delicious grass! So here were a couple of ideas I was thinking maybe…
I was trying to think of a tool that we could both work on separate parts of the puzzle and then piece them together. One possibility is Prezi - used a lot these days, but could do the trick. Maybe the title could be something like “What ISP Can Do For You” or your school or students or whatever. Then we could have sections on the background and benefits - “About ISP”, “Help Your Student Feel More At Ease About Research”, “Give Your Teachers a Framework to Teach Inquiry” - my wordings are bad but you get the idea. Yes, those are good ideas. I have made a prezi before, so I am not a complete virgin. I came up with something, of course I think it’s the greatest since sliced bread. I told my other group and we will probably discuss on Monday. If we dont’ use it for that, we can use it for this if we want: COLLABORATION MAKES LEARNING EXPONENTIAL. I think that is great! Sliced bread great? jk lol Yes! I am going to be struggling with slogan ideas for that project - yours is fantastic. WEll, we already picked one that is pretty good, so maybe it’ll work for this PP. I’ll let you know. Ok that sounds good. Have you ever used Smore? Uh, I eat smores… As does anyone who isn’t insane. Smore is a little bit like Glogster - it makes these cool looking flyers but that it another possibility. You create the headline and subheading, then add different components - I was imagining it like tabs - one tab for each of our selling points. Then a couple of tabs for our lesson plan ideas. The tabs could have an embedded video, or an infographic or whatever. Also, an infographic would be cool for the process and also even a flowchart to show our lesson plans (like a progession of steps).
I opened the smores and it looks good. Very clean. I think it’s a good idea. The only drawback is that I don’t think there is a way to partner edit, although if we shared a username and password that would probably accomplish the same thing. I say let’s use it. Do you want to set up a skeleton? Yes I will do that before we meet again. Also check out easel.ly - that might be a good one to create our infographic(s). Ooh, those are awesome...Good choice. I haven’t even used either of them, so it will be good experience. Well, should we start expanding your basic outline now or do you want to work some on our own? Well hows about….we individually brainstorm our top selling points for the assignment. We will share them through the discussion feature :) Then the next time we talk (Tuesday?) we could decide which ones are going to make the cut, who is going to do what, and maybe what formats we might want to use (like text or a screencast or whatever). You’re the man with the plan...That sounds great. Ok cool. Okay, so Tuesday 8:30 with our brainstorm of top selling points.
Yes - have a great evening and I will talk to you later! Ok, bye!